On August 1, 2001, I began my new position as Jewish Staff Scholar at the ICJS. Six weeks later, the context in which the ICJS works was changed drastically. The attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. brought to the fore the need for Americans to understand and interact with Islam. I have been asked the same question (in different variations) any number of times. Usually it goes something like this: "When is the ICJS going to become the ICJMS?" meaning, of course, the "Insti-tute for Christian & Jewish & Muslim Studies."

The desire to broaden the dialogue to include Islam represents a laudable motivation. Indeed, for many years it was Jewish participants in Christian-Jewish dialogue who pushed for the inclusion of Islam. Here in Baltimore there is a long-standing "trialogue" under the auspices of the Baltimore Jewish Council. Islam is clearly a part of the same "family" of religions, and many of the narratives of the Bible are found in the Qur’an as well. There is a long history of interaction between the three faiths. Depending on whose statistics are accepted, there may well be as many Muslims as Jews living in the United States. While Jews and Muslims in America sometimes clash over Middle East politics, they share the experience of being a non-Christian, immigrant community in a largely Christian America. Indeed, observant Muslims in smaller towns will often turn to the local rabbi for help with obtaining food, since Muslims accept kosher meat as fitting the requirements of Islamic "hallal" slaughter. The necessity for dialogue with Islam is real, for reasons that include and go beyond the current geopolitical realities.

On occasion, ICJS programs have included Islamic perspec-tives. Last fall, our programs with Prof. Sulayman Nyang of Howard University were both intellectually stimulating and well attended. Nevertheless, there are important reasons why the ICJS' focus on the specific encounter between Judaism and Christianity remains necessary.

Some of the press to broaden the focus of our work may come from a subconscious assumption that Christian-Jewish hostility is a thing of the past, that the issues between Jews and Christians have been resolved. While it is certainly true that there has been a marked improvement in Jewish-Christian relations in the past decades, it would be a mistake to con-clude that the work of the ICJS and like-minded organizations is no longer necessary. Continued dialogue and discussion is needed to make sure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

But the mission of the ICJS is not merely one of community relations, of avoiding enmity and discord. The insight of the ICJS is that there is a unique relationship between Judaism and Christianity. That uniqueness has often in the past been a source of anguish, but there have been moments when it was a source of blessing as well. It is our task to ensure that it becomes even more beneficial to both communities.

Jews and Christians share not only a history but also a text -- what Jews call the Tanach and Christians call the Old Testa-ment. It is true that the two communities have understood those texts in radically different ways, and continue to do so. (Although there is often as much intra-Jewish or intra-Christian disagreement about the meaning of a certain text as there is between Jews and Christians, as anyone who has par-ticipated in an ICJS text study can readily testify.) Nevertheless, when Christians and Jews read Genesis to-gether, or Isaiah, or the Book of Esther, they are both reading their community's sacred scripture, their foundational docu-ment. No other religion, not even Islam, relates to our shared text in that way.

So interfaith encounter has two distinct, if overlapping, agendas. One is the reduction of prejudice. The other is the paradoxical discovery that we deepen our connection to our own tradition as we learn to appreciate that of our partner in dialogue.

The ICJS' decision to remain focused on the Christian-Jewish encounter in no way negates the importance or validity of other types of encounter. But as Rabbi David Novak suggested in a talk in Toronto last year, there are specific historical and theological issues between any two of the three communities that don't involve the third; therefore, parallel Christian-Jewish, Jewish-Islamic, and Islamic-Christian dialogues may well be more valuable than a "trialogue."

The progress that has been made in the relationship between Christians and Jews in the last few decades can serve as a model for other communities with similar conflicts. If two groups with such a history of enmity have now come to appreciate and value each other, might not other groups do the same? And of course, Jews and Christians can take the lessons they have learned about the humanity and integrity of each other and apply them in their encounters with other groups as well.

So by all means, let us broaden the conversation. At the same time, let's recognize that what takes place in a dialogue situation is very different than what takes place in a multi-party conversation. The ICJS has developed an important expertise, and we will continue to do what we do well, while supporting those who apply this hard-won wisdom to advance peace in a multitude of religious conflicts.